Gerrymandering forges onward ...

Every time I hear someone advocate for "bi-partisan redistricting committees" it always seems hopefully naive. Here's an example of why: Odds of Gerrymandering Grow in New York as Redistricting Panel Falters

The Democrats controlled it all in Nevada this time and they gerrymandered the hell out of the state assembly giving them a likely supermajority, with very few competitive districts, after the elections this year. They also gerrymandered our four Congressional districts by pulling Democratic areas from heavily Democratic NV-1 and shoring up NV-3 and NV-4, which have been swing districts. This shit needs to be made illegal in every state. What's the point of even showing up to vote anymore?

Redistricting panels aren't perfect, but you'll likely get fairer districts as opposed to leaving it up to the politicians.
 
Michigan and California hve done this successfully.

I don't know about Michigan's, but I wouldn't necessarily call California a success. There is a lawsuit pending against their new proposal because their new "bipartisan" map has been accused of being fairly partisan.
 
The Democrats controlled it all in Nevada this time and they gerrymandered the hell out of the state assembly giving them a likely supermajority, with very few competitive districts, after the elections this year. They also gerrymandered our four Congressional districts by pulling Democratic areas from heavily Democratic NV-1 and shoring up NV-3 and NV-4, which have been swing districts. This shit needs to be made illegal in every state. What's the point of even showing up to vote anymore?

Redistricting panels aren't perfect, but you'll likely get fairer districts as opposed to leaving it up to the politicians.
Maybe. But I think, as in the example from NYC, it's just kicking the can. The partisan struggle merely changes into a fight over who controls the "independent" panels
 
Maybe. But I think, as in the example from NYC, it's just kicking the can. The partisan struggle merely changes into a fight over who controls the "independent" panels

Generally, the independent panels have an even number of Republicans and Democrats and then some like, California, will also have a handful of independents. The problem with California, for example, is the so-called "independents" have turned out to have some fairly strong ties to the Democratic Party. A lawsuit filed by RNC Committeewoman Harmeet Dhillon has accused them of violating rules and holding non-public meetings. The guy who started the ballot initiative in the late 2000s to get the redistricting committee created has also expressed displeasure in the way it's worked out. When you look at California's new map, the shape of those districts doesn't exactly scream bipartisan to me.
 
Oh some were pissed that it ruined their plans, and others because they now find themselves in competition for a seat within their own party. Both sides were hit by it.

The biggest example was state senator Amanda Chase (Trump in heels) whose home address was moved to another US congressional district.

'Trump in heels' Amanda Chase discontinues congressional run after redistricting
That does not matter. She only has to be a resident of the state, not the district.

Maxine Waters in California lives nowhere near the district she represents.
 
Generally, the independent panels have an even number of Republicans and Democrats and then some like, California, will also have a handful of independents. The problem with California, for example, is the so-called "independents" have turned out to have some fairly strong ties to the Democratic Party. A lawsuit filed by RNC Committeewoman Harmeet Dhillon has accused them of violating rules and holding non-public meetings. The guy who started the ballot initiative in the late 2000s to get the redistricting committee created has also expressed displeasure in the way it's worked out. When you look at California's new map, the shape of those districts doesn't exactly scream bipartisan to me.
I think it going to take a shift to multi-representative districts - eg on large district, with five reps.
 
?? Not sure what you're getting at.
LOL. First off, Democrats questioned the results of the 2016 election for four years. And, every time Democrats lose an election or elections, they question the results of the election and call it gerrymandering or question the electoral college. Now the midterms aren't even here yet and Democrats are already questioning the integrity of the elections, calling the results gerrymandering before they even know the election results. But, Trump or Republicans aren't allowed to question elections, only Democrats are.
 
LOL. First off, Democrats questioned the results of the 2016 election for four years. And, every time Democrats lose an election or elections, they question the results of the election and call it gerrymandering or question the electoral college. Now the midterms aren't even here yet and Democrats are already questioning the integrity of the elections, calling the results gerrymandering before they even know the election results. But, Trump or Republicans aren't allowed to question elections, only Democrats are.
Hmm... ok. Well, in this case, the Dems are the ones doing the gerrymandering. It's supposed to be an "independent" panel, but partisanship is not to be denied.
 

Forum List

Back
Top